Get Feith and Exit Iraq Without Bush by Ahmed Amr
www.dissidentvoice.org
November 30, 2006

“They say that the
killings and kidnappings are being carried out by men in police uniforms
and with police vehicles but everybody in Baghdad knows that the killers
and kidnappers are real policemen." Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari
(quoted by Patrick Cockburn, The Independent 11/26/2006)

Paul Bremer to
Newsweek (2/9/2004): "The two most popular things I've done since I've
been here are the de-Baathication decree … and the disbanding of the
Army."

Paul Bremer to
USA Today four months later (6/17/2004): “People say I disbanded the
army. There was no army to disband. It didn't exist. It wasn't here.”

As
the sectarian bloodletting in Iraq intensifies, it is easy to lose track
of the American policies that unleashed the carnage. Even the anti-war
movement seems to have accepted the conventional wisdom that the
insurgency and the Shiite death squads attired in police uniforms were
unfortunate and unpredictable byproducts of a noble neo-con project to
establish a progressive western oriented state in a turbulent region.

The greatest acts of
deception in this war of choice were not the WMD allegations or the canard
that Saddam was behind the atrocities of 9/11. The bigger lie is that the
United States was on an idealistic expedition to fight tyranny and spread
the gospel of democracy.

Bringing on the Insurgency

One can trace the
emergence of the insurgency to Emperor Paul Bremer’s arrival in Baghdad on
May 12, 2003. The American pro-consul wasted no time in issuing his first
two decrees -- De-Baathification and disbanding the Iraqi army. Four days
after arriving in Iraq, Bremer fired 30,000 senior Baath Party officials
from the government. A few days later, he dissolved the army, putting more
than 400,000 Iraqi officers and soldiers out on the street without
pensions.

The conventional
wisdom is that Bremer ‘made a mistake’ that eventually led to the birth of
the insurgency in the Sunni Triangle. The pro-consul’s first two edicts
were correctly perceived as a frontal assault against the Sunni Arab
minority and the response was predictable.

Bremer’s marching
orders came straight from Douglas Feith -- the neo-con Pentagon wizard
appointed by Rumsfeld to redesign post-war Iraq after sidelining Collin
Powell and the State Department. The enduring myth that the United States
had no post-war plan is bunk. The State Department’s legion of experts
spent months meticulously putting together reconstruction plans that were
shelved because the authors were deemed to be ‘Arabists.’ The neo-con
dictionary definition of an Arabist is a seasoned American diplomat with
first hand experience in the Middle East who can’t pass the pro-Israeli
litmus test.

For the record,
Douglas Feith was the same neo-con operative tasked with setting up the
pre-war WMD intelligence manufacturing plant known as the Office of
Special Plans. The mission of this rogue Pentagon ‘intelligence’ unit was
to sideline the CIA and fabricate tall tales that eventually ended up as
leaks on the front pages of The New York Times and The
Washington Post -- courtesy of Judith Miller and other Likudnik
spinmeisters.

Feith Motivated by Likudnik Faith

Feith’s fingerprints
are all over the Iraqi debacle. For all his troubles, General Tommy Franks
nominated Feith as “the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth.”

In hindsight, it
appears that General Franks overlooked Feith’s biographical data. Had
Franks taken the time to assess Feith’s Likudnik affiliations -- he might
have reached an entirely different conclusion. If anything, Feith achieved
a level of success beyond his wildest neo-con fantasies.

For background
information on Feith, General Franks should have consulted Jim Lobe -- a
respected expert on the neo-conservative cabal that hijacked American
foreign policy after 9/11. One of Lobe’s articles dating back to November
3, 2003 is a must read. “Loss of Feith in Douglas” sheds quite a bit of
light on Feith’s Likudnik Bona Fides. The article amounts to a detailed
resume of the former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. Lobe paints a
picture of a committed Zionist who can only be described as a radical
Israel Firster with political views that conform to the extreme right of
the Israeli political spectrum.

Douglas Feith’s Likudnik
Bona Fides

What follows are
some of the
highlights from the Jim Lobe’s article which documented Feith’s long
career as a Netenyahu Likudnik.

“A protégé of
Richard Perle, the former chairman of Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board (DPB)
who stands at the center of the neo-conservative foreign policy network in
Washington, Feith has long opposed territorial compromise by Israel. He
was an outspoken foe of the Oslo process and even the Camp David peace
agreement mediated by former president Jimmy Carter between Egypt and
Israel. His former law partner, L Marc Zell, is a spokesman for the Jewish
settlers' movement on the occupied West Bank.”

“Also like Perle,
Feith has long taken a strong interest in Israel and its security. His
father, Dalck Feith, a philanthropist and major Republican contributor
from Philadelphia, was active in the militantly Zionist youth movement
Betar, the predecessor of Israel's Likud Party, in Poland before World War
Two.”

“Both father and
son have been honored by the Zionist Organization of America, which,
unlike other mainstream Jewish groups in the US, has consistently
supported Likud positions and the settlement movement in the occupied
territories and actively courted the Christian Right.”

“Feith also served
with Perle on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security
Affairs, a think tank that promotes military and strategic ties between
the US and Israel.”

“In 1996, he
participated in a study group chaired by Perle and sponsored by a
right-wing Jerusalem-based think tank that produced a report calling for
incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to build a strategic alliance
with Turkey, Jordan and a new government in Iraq that would transform the
balance of power in the Middle East in such a way that Israel could
decisively resist pressure to trade "land for peace" with the Palestinians
or Syria.”

“In 1997, he published a lengthy article, "A Strategy for Israel",
published in Commentary magazine, where Feith argued that Israel should
repudiate the Oslo accords and move to re-occupy those parts of the West
Bank and Gaza that had been transferred to the Palestinian Authority.”

“ Two years later, he and Perle signed an open letter to then-president
Bill Clinton calling for Washington to work with Chalabi's Iraqi National
Congress to oust Saddam Hussein.”

“In May 2000, they signed a report calling for the US to be prepared to
attack the Syria militarily unless Damascus failed to withdraw its troops
from Lebanon.”

Feith Was Faithful to His Country: Israel

Feith’s policy
decisions cannot be divorced from his ideology. And his motives can only
be deciphered in light of his long history as an agitator for the Israeli
Lobby. Even the blind should be able to recognize Douglas Feith for what
he is -- disciplined and committed Likudnik operative. In evaluating
Feith’s edicts, one has to think of the desired objectives of his mentors
in Tel Aviv. Feith wanted what his country wanted. And his country was
Israel.

Why the Invasion of Iraq Was Good for
Israel?

And what exactly did
Israel want? Israel would like nothing more than to see Iraq partitioned.
It has a long history of supporting Kurdish separatists -- if only the
Iraqi variety. In deference to its strategic alliances with Ankara, Tel
Aviv has an entirely different attitude towards Turkey’s Kurdish rebels.

Sabotaging the Arab
nationalist movement has always been a strategic goal of Zionism. For
Feith’s Israeli mentors, the outbreak of civil war and chaos in Iraq or
any other Arab country is considered a good thing. The Likudnik obsession
with the Baath Party is rooted in Israel’s fear of a resurgence of
pro-Palestinian pan-Arab nationalism. Historically, the pan-Arabists gave
the Palestinians safe havens in addition to financial, material and
diplomatic support.

But that was
history. In the real world, pan-Arabism continues to endure only in the
minds of a few bureaucrats at the Arab League. Amr Mousa will probably go
down in history as the last of the genuine pan-Arab Mohicans.

The Camp David
Accord and Egypt’s separate peace has already led to the disappearance of
Nasserism from the political map of the region. That left Baghdad and
Damascus as the last outposts of the pan-Arab nationalism.

In the case of Iraq,
Saddam’s token support for the Palestinians was calculated to shore up his
regime’s domestic legitimacy. Regardless, that was enough to put him on
the Likudnik hit list. Old Israeli habits die hard and so it is that Tel
Aviv continues to fight the ghost of a movement that no longer exists.

Against the backdrop
of the Iraq war, Sharon and Olmert were granted ample space and time to
systematically pulverize the Palestinians into slave-like submission. The
goal was to get their leadership to accept an ‘independent state’ in Gaza
and a few walled in mini-bantustans in the West Bank.

The conduct of
American occupation troops in Iraq legitimized Israeli tactics. The use
of torture, loose rules of engagement, scorched earth policies, collective
punishment and the branding of insurgents as common criminals and
terrorists were all Israeli standard operating procedures.

Douglas Feith and
Paul Wolfowitz played a pivotal role in selling these policies to the
Pentagon. The neo-con insiders and their Likudnik collaborators in the
mass media wanted to market the notion that America’s occupation of Iraq
and Israel’s repression of the Palestinians were noble campaigns by two
allies fighting in the same trench against a common enemy -- the
irrational demonic forces of ‘Islamic terror.’ The Palestinians were not
fighting for their liberty -- they were just acting out because they
subscribed to a culture that breeds violence. In the same vein, Iraqi
insurgents were not resisting the occupation of their country by foreign
armies. They were just one huge Al-Qaeda cell operated by remote control
from a cave in Afghanistan.

Neo-cons Recycle old Israeli Blueprints

Historical analogies
are not always useful. But if one were to search for a conflict that had
the same blue print as the war in Iraq and ended up with pretty much the
same results -- it would be the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

Both invasions were
unprovoked unilateral acts of aggression. The pipe dream in Lebanon was
that Israel would empower the Shiites in the south, ‘liberate’ them from
the PLO and install a pro-Israeli government under Bashir Gemayel -- the
Phalangist warlord. Eighteen years later, the Israelis withdrew in the
middle of the night after losing a war of attrition against Hezbollah --
an Iranian backed Shiite resistance movement that was created to resist
Israeli occupation.

The thing about
Likudniks is that they are intellectually inflexible ideologues mired in a
fantasy world with doctored history and delusional expectations. If at
first they don’t succeed in Lebanon, they roll out the same worn out blue
prints in Iraq two decades later and repeat the fiasco -- this time with
American blood and American treasure. And so it was that Feith and
Wolfowitz set out on a long cakewalk in Mesopotamia to ‘liberate’ the Shia
and Kurds and install Ahmed Chalabi as the leader of a pro-Israeli
American client state in Baghdad.

Early Rumors of Government Death Squads

With the growing
insurgency, Rumsfeld’s initial assessment that the rebels were just a
bunch of ‘dead-enders’ was discredited. The Bush administration and the
neo-con priesthood scrambled to deal with the new realities. Writing in
the New York Times (Nov. 16, 2003), Max Boot openly advocated the
use of assassination teams modeled after the CIA’s Phoenix project in
Vietnam.

“We can still learn
important lessons from that earlier war about how to deal with the
insurgency. What proved most effective in Vietnam were not large
conventional operations but targeted counterinsurgency programs. Four
--known as CAP, Cords, Kit Carson Scouts and Phoenix -- were particularly
effective.

Phoenix was a joint
C.I.A.-South Vietnam effort to identify and eradicate Vietcong cadres in
villages. Critics later charged the program with carrying out
assassinations, and even William Colby acknowledged there were "excesses."
Nevertheless, far more cadres were captured (33,000) or induced to defect
under Phoenix (22,000) than were killed (26,000).

There is little
doubt that if the United States had placed more emphasis on such programs,
instead of the army's conventional strategy, it would have fared better in
Vietnam.”

Max Boot is no
ordinary pundit -- he is a certifiable neo-con who hangs his hat at the
influential Council of Foreign Relations -- one of the think tanks that
marketed the war. It wasn’t long before journalist Seymour Hersh was
revealing that U.S. Army Special Forces were conducting “pre-emptive man
hunting operations” targeted at former Ba’athist and other civilians
suspected of supporting the insurgency.

On January 5, 2004,
Julian Coman of the Telegraph filed the following report from
Washington:

Nine months after
the end of Saddam Hussein's regime and his feared intelligence force, Iraq
is to get a secret police force again -- courtesy of Washington.

The Bush
Administration will fund the agency in its latest bid to root out the
Baathist loyalists behind the insurgency in parts of Iraq. The force will
cost up to $US3 billion ($A4 billion) over the next three years.

Its ranks will
comprise Iraqi exile groups, Kurdish and Shiite forces -- and former
agents who are now working for the Americans. CIA officers in Baghdad will
play a leading role in directing their operations.

A former US
intelligence officer said: "If successfully set up, the group would work
in tandem with American forces but would have its own structure and
relative independence. It could be expected to be fairly ruthless in
dealing with the remnants of Saddam."

Although officially
banned by the ruling Coalition Provisional Authority, militia groups are
already patrolling in Iraq, resulting in an increasing death toll of top
former Ba’thists.

The US hopes to
organize the various groups into one force with the local knowledge,
motivation and authority to hunt down resistance fighters. According to
Washington, the new agency could number 10,000. Initially, salaries will
be paid by the CIA, which has 275 officers in Iraq. The force is intended
to have a crucial role in post-Saddam Iraq.

"The presence of a
powerful secret police ... will mean that the new Iraqi political regime
will not stray outside the parameters that the US wants to set," said John
Pike, an expert on classified military budgets at the Global Security
organization. "To begin with, the new Iraqi government will reign but not
rule."

Inviting SCIRI’s Death Squads to the
Interior Ministry

The death squads
began infiltrating the security forces right under the eyes of Bremer and
Feith. Thousands of hard core disciples of the Supreme Council for the
Islamic Revolution (SCIRI) in Iraq were ushered into the ranks of the
Iraqi police and Special Forces. Many of their cadres had been trained and
indoctrinated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Now, why would Feith
set into motion an irreversible process that basically handed the security
apparatus to Tehran’s allies? Well, because, at the time, the neo-con
crystal ball predicted a spontaneous Iranian uprising that would convert
Iran into a carbon copy of Turkey -- a country that has cordial relations
with Tel Aviv. Apparently, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hadn’t shown up on Feith’s
radar screen.

It didn’t take long
for SCIRI’s militias -- the Badr brigades -- to make their presence felt
on the streets of Iraq. On Feb 3, 2004, David Enders of the Asia Times
reported that “the police are increasingly reliant on other local groups
to help them do their jobs. "The Badr troops often make arrests for us,"
said Colonel Karim Hussein "They are training to help us do our jobs."

The Road to Civil War

Two years ago,
Ayatollah Abdelaziz al-Hakim, SCIRI’s leader, publicly declared his intent
to take over the police forces. James Hider of the London Times
reported on this new development on January 12, 2005.

“An Iranian-backed
Ayatollah tipped to become Iraq's first elected leader in decades said
yesterday that he would carry out a purge of Iraq's intelligence and
security structures if his party wins power. Asked if he planned a
sweeping purge of the intelligence and security forces that the Americans
built up piecemeal after the war, the Ayatollah, who once commanded
SCIRI’s 10,000-strong militia, said: "For sure. If we want to improve the
security situation. It's natural and it's one of our priorities." In their
place, he said he would install "loyal Iraqis and the believers (in God),
and those who believe in the process of change in Iraq.”

"If he forms the
government, that will be a disaster. He'll purge the army, purge the
police and put his own men in it," said Ghassan al-Atiyyah, a secular Shia
commentator, who is trying to build bridges with the Sunni community and
defuse the uprising. "This is the road to civil war."

A strange thing
happened when SCIRI emerged as the largest party in the Shia coalition
that won the transitional government elections. Ayatollah Abdelaziz
al-Hakim didn’t emerge as the Prime Minister. That position went to
Ibrahim Jaafari of the Daawa Party. Al-Hakim had his sights on a much more
powerful position -- the interior ministry. Sure enough, one of his aides,
Bayan Jabr, was appointed as Interior Minister in April 2005.

Bayan Jabr wasted no
time in making his mark. As Iraq’s senior police officer, he started
converting the ministry into the official residence of the death squads.
By May, he had launched the purge promised by Al-Hakim.

“In May 2005, Shiite
militia groups in Iraq began depositing corpses into the dumps of Baghdad.
The victims, overwhelmingly Sunni, were typically handcuffed, their
corpses showing signs of torture -- broken skulls, burn marks, electric
drill holes; by that October, the death toll attributed to such groups had
reached 500.” (Harper’s Magazine -- 08/06/2006.)

Jabr is the kind of
thug who likes to get his hands dirty. The SCIRI operative who continues
to serve as finance minister in Maliki’s cabinet was personally involved
in death squad activities.

A year ago, Solomon
Moore of the Los Angeles Times painted a pretty graphic picture of
the Shiite death squads in the Iraqi police force (11/29/2005). It was a
long feature that gave a vivid and disturbing account of the reign of
terror orchestrated by the militia infested Baghdad security forces. But
perhaps the most alarming thing about the article was the allegation that
Jabr had a direct hand in drawing up death lists.

“This month, U.S.
forces raided a secret Interior Ministry detention facility in southern
Baghdad operated by police intelligence officials linked to the Badr
Brigade, a Shiite militia that has long-standing ties to Iran and to
Iraq's leading Shiite political party. Inmates compiled a handwritten list
of 18 detainees at the bunker who were allegedly tortured to death while
in custody. The list was authenticated by a U.S. official and given to
Justice Ministry authorities for investigation. It was later provided to
The Times.

The U.S. military is
investigating whether police officers who worked at the secret prison were
trained by American interrogation experts. An Aug. 18 police operations
report addressed to Interior Minister Bayan Jabr, who has ties to the Badr
militia, listed the names of 14 Sunni Arab men arrested during a predawn
sweep in the Baghdad neighborhood of Iskaan. Six weeks later, their bodies
were discovered near the Iranian border, badly decomposed. All of the
corpses showed signs of torture, and each still wore handcuffs and had
been shot three times in the back of the head, Baghdad morgue officials
said.”

Outsourcing Torture to Bayan Jabr and SCIRI

After Abu Ghraib,
the Bush administration apparently decided to outsource torture to Bayan
Jabr’s goons. It was a natural extension of the administrations
‘rendition’ policies.

Jeffrey Fleishman
filed this report on June 19, 2005. “The public war on the Iraqi
insurgency has led to an atmosphere of hidden brutalities, including abuse
and torture, carried out against detainees by the nation's special
security forces, according to defense lawyers, international organizations
and Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights.

Up to 60% of the
estimated 12,000 detainees in the country's prisons and military compounds
face intimidation, beatings or torture that leads to broken bones and
sometimes death, said Saad Sultan, head of a board overseeing the
treatment of prisoners at the Human Rights Ministry. He added that police
and security forces attached to the Interior Ministry are responsible for
most abuses.

The units have used
tactics reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's secret intelligence squads,
according to the ministry and independent human rights groups and lawyers,
who have cataloged abuses.

"We've documented a
lot of torture cases," said Sultan, whose committee is pushing for wider
access to Iraqi-run prisons across the nation. "There are beatings,
punching, electric shocks to the body, including sensitive areas, hanging
prisoners upside down and beating them and dragging them on the ground….
Many police officers come from a culture of torture from their experiences
over the last 35 years. Most of them worked during Saddam's regime." (The
Times 6/19/2005)

New and Improved Canards

Now that we have put
behind us the WMD canards and Iraq’s non-existent links to the atrocities
of 9/11 -- the Bush administration and its mass media collaborators are
marketing new and improved lies.

The new tall tale is
that we went to Iraq on a noble mission to spread the blessings of
democracy in the region. And that the democratically elected Prime
Minister, Nouri Al-Maliki, is being subverted by rouge death squads and
the insurgents. There is only one problem with this scenario: Maliki is
the defacto leader of the death squads. He’s quite happy to have the
Marines engaging the insurgents in Ramadi while his security forces and
allied militias go about the nasty business of ethnically cleansing
Baghdad.

Fully two years ago,
there was more than enough evidence to suggest that the Bush
administration was complicit in establishing and nurturing death squads.
Long after the death squads appeared on the scene -- outfitted in their
official issue police uniforms -- American advisers continued to equip,
train and provide logistical support to the Iranian trained militants who
had infiltrated the security forces.

It’s hard to imagine
that the folks in the Pentagon and the CIA failed to notice the open
collaboration of the Iraqi security forces with the death squads. The
history of this dark chapter in the American occupation of Iraq is slowly
coming to light thanks to folks like Seymour Hersh and Kim Sengupta. While
Hersh’s initial accounts were met by denial, The Pentagon no longer
bothers disputing articles like one by Sengupta that appeared in The
Independent on 10/31/2006.

“This is a shadowy
struggle, which involves tortured prisoners huddled in dungeons, murder
victims mutilated with knives and electric drills, and distraught families
searching for relations who have been “disappeared.” Iraq’s savage
sectarian war is now regarded as a greater obstacle to any semblance of
peace returning than the insurgency. Yet, ironically, the death squads are
the result of US policy. At the beginning of last year, with no end to the
Sunni insurgency in sight, the Pentagon was reported to have decided to
train Shia and Kurdish fighters to carry out “irregular missions.” The
policy, exposed in the US media, was called the “Salvador Option” after
the American-backed counter-insurgency in Latin America more than 20 years
ago, which led to 70,000 deaths and countless instances of human rights
abuse.”

The death squads are
an instrument. The goal is partition.

Israel and its
neo-con operatives at the Pentagon were not the only forces working
towards partition. The Kurds wanted it and Al-Hakim and SCIRI are sparing
no effort to achieve the same goal.

But there was always
one major obstacle that stood in the way of partition. It was called
Baghdad. The Iraqi capital is home to one of every four Iraqis. Its seven
million residents are a mix of Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and others. Before
the war, it was a secular city where Shiites and Sunnis lived in relative
harmony as evidenced by the high percentage of mixed marriages and mixed
neighborhoods. It was the kind of place where it was considered poor
manners to ask another person’s sect.

To partition Iraq,
one must first partition Baghdad. What appears to be random tit-for-tat
violence is actually part of a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing.
The greatest mass migration in the modern history of the Middle East is
underway. Over a million Iraqis have left the countries to seek refuge in
Jordan, Syria and elsewhere. They include a high percentage of the crème
de la crème of Iraq’s professional class.

According to the
United Nations, one hundred thousands Iraqi refugees are abandoning the
country every month. A disproportionate number are Iraqi Sunnis and Iraqi
Christians.

But there is another
great exodus going on -- a million plus Iraqis have been internally
displaced. In Baghdad, the Sunnis are seeking safe haven west of the
Tigris and the Shiites are drifting to the east bank of the river. Sadr
City is operating as an independent theocracy under the rule of the Al
Mahdi army. Other mixed cities like Kirkuk, Mosul and Baqouba are also
experiencing ethnic cleansing campaigns.

The Erosion of American
Influence in Iraq

As the Iraqi civil
war has evolved, the ability of the Bush administration to control the
course of events has steadily eroded. That was probably the major reason
for going through the motions of ‘restoring sovereignty’ to the Iraqi
government. By discarding the “occupation” label -- the United States
absolved itself of the legal obligation to provide security for the
citizens of its Iraqi colony.

The United States
military began withdrawing from Iraq two years ago. The majority of
American troops never leave their fortified bases. And the primary
mission of the troops in Iraq is force protection. Bush and Rumsfeld have
publicly declared that they have no intention of intervening in a civil
war that they refuse to acknowledge even exists.

So why continue
deploying 150,000 military personnel at a cost of two billion dollars a
week? Because Bush and his collaborators in both parties can’t figure a
face saving way to reach the exit door. Just today, he was still blaming
all his troubles on Al Qaeda, a force that didn’t exist in Iraq before the
invasion.

Leaving Iraq under
the control of a government run by the leaders of the same Iranian trained
militias that operate the death squads also poses a challenge. Partition
or no partition, Iran will emerge as the dominant force in the region.

The Gulf monarchs
who actively backed and facilitated the neo-con inspired invasion are
visibly shaken by the results of their folly. No one has ever accused the
Machiavellian custodians of the oil plantations of being the brightest
bulbs in the room.

Feith and Wolfowitz
are long gone. No matter -- the damage they intended to inflict on Iraq is
done. They are definitely entitled to hang up the ‘mission accomplished’
sign. Their Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, is obviously satisfied with the
results. During his official visit to the United States on November 13th,
he thanked Bush for the Mess on Potamia. “We in the Middle East have
followed the American policy in Iraq for a long time, and we are very much
impressed and encouraged by the stability which the great operation of
America in Iraq brought to the Middle East.”

Bush also had kind
words for Olmert. “The whole central thrust of our discussions was based
upon our understanding that we're involved in an ideological struggle
between extremists and radicals versus people who just simply want to live
in peace.” Just a few months ago, Olmert and Bush teamed up to inflict a
whole bunch of peace on Lebanon.

Exiting Iraq Without Bush

Where Bush goes from
here is anybody’s guess. This empty shell of a man is susceptible to the
last idea whispered in his ear, so long as it conforms to his shallow
understanding of a fantasy world that exists only in his imagination. His
ignorance and ineptitude are dwarfed only by his ego. We have an extremist
in the White House who, after six years of neo-con indoctrination, is
incapable of making rational judgments. The president is still immersed in
delusions about leading victory parades down Pennsylvania Avenue. He is
willing to expend whatever amount of blood and treasure necessary to leave
Iraq in the lap of the next occupant of the White House.

The quickest way out
of Iraq is impeachment. Elizabeth de la Vega has just published a book
titled United States v. George W. Bush et al. The former federal
prosecutor is an expert at trying fraud cases. Read her book and you will
walk away convinced that she has a closed and shut case proving that Bush
and Cheney committed fraud against the American people to launch this war
of choice.

After reading the
book, don’t put it away. Walk it down to your congressional representative
and ask them for a book report. Better yet, get your book club to read
the book and take your pals along for a visit to your Senator.

While you’re waiting
for the impeachment hearings, have the Senate intelligence committee
resume its investigation of Douglas Feith. The pre-election Republican
dominated committee has already blocked that probe for over a year. Now
that the Democrats are in control, let’s see if Hillary Clinton is
interested in the truth before she invades the White House with her own
hand picked team of neo-cons.

* In the meantime,
follow this link and see why Elizabeth de la Vega is about to rock
America by blasting Bush et al out of the White House.